Twitter
Advertisement

Bombay High Court provides relief in trademark case over use of 'Vogue'

The magazine referred to its reputation by relying on the quotes of Indian celebrities publications in reputed international journals, as also decided cases of various courts of the USA as well as of India, in support of their case that trademark "Vogue", is a well-known mark entitled not only to protection in the classes in which it is registered, but also other classes generally.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The Bombay High Court refused to grant interim relief to fashion magazine 'Vogue', which sought an injunction against a private company -- Just Life Styles, which has retail shops across India by the name 'Just In Vogue', which sells lifestyle products like watches, writing instruments etc, from using its trademark.

Justice S C Gupte, while rejecting the plea of Advance Magazine Publishers, which has been publishing the magazine in India, since 2OO7 had moved the court saying: "The defendant is a retailer of fashion goods and is certainly entitled to describe his stores as an outlet, which deals in fashionable or trendy goods, that is to say, goods which are "in vogue". It cannot be said that there is any prima facie case of dishonest adoption by them so as to trade on the reputation or goodwill of the mark of the plaintiff - Vogue."

The magazine referred to its reputation by relying on the quotes of Indian celebrities publications in reputed international journals, as also decided cases of various courts of the USA as well as of India, in support of their case that trademark "Vogue", is a well-known mark entitled not only to protection in the classes in which it is registered, but also other classes generally.

The plea read: "The use of the trademark 'just in vogue' featuring prominently the word -- Vogue amounts to an infringement of the well-known trademark 'Vogue'. Thus, adoption of the trademark is ex facie deliberate, wilful and mala fide with intent to capitalize on the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiffs and give an impression to the public that the service of the defendants are associated with or connected to the plaintiffs.

The court, however, after going through the plea and arguments said: "While the plaintiff's magazines are read by their consumers, the defendant's services are used for buying goods of reputable third parties. The target users of the plaintiff goods are intelligent, affluent, well travelled women in the age group of 26 to 45. On the other hand, customers of the defendant are said to be primarily men from the middle strata of the society. There is no commonality in the trade channels of the two. Thus, it is absurd to suggest that discerning customers, who are expected to buy these goods are likely to somehow imagine that these goods or the retail services offered by the defendant in connection with them have some trade connection or association with the plaintiff."

The court further added: "Magazine publishers are not ordinarily known to be retailing fashion goods, and hardly anyone is likely to be misled into believing that the magazine and the fashion goods come from the same source."

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement